Media Matters goes beyond simply reporting on current trends and hot topics to get to the heart of media, advertising and marketing issues with insightful analyses and critiques that help create a perspective on industry buzz throughout the year. It's a must-read supplement to our research annuals.
Sign up now to subscribe or access the Archives
Now, more than ever, there is an emphasis on finding data to “prove” the efficacy of the media as advertising vehicles. The culmination of this data-driven approach can be found in the quixotic quest for a single metric that could be used to compare the media.
It's worth noting that since the early-1960s computerized cross-media selection models have been in use by major ad agencies, as have many statistical ROI studies, all attempting to determine which media mix is “the best.” Unfortunately, it’s as if nothing has been learned from these past endeavors. But why is this so?
One reason is the disconnect between media and marketing. Sadly, marketing executives—advertiser CMOs in particular—lost interest in the media function years ago. To them (and for that matter, many ad agency managers), the main focus is on how brands are positioned and how effectively their ad messages communicate this to the public. In short, the “creative” function. Media is seen primarily as a bean counting exercise, and its main duty is to use whatever media the client is most comfortable with—usually TV—and buy enough eyeballs for the ad campaign to do its work. And at the lowest cost, of course.
Advertiser brand managers/CMOs and media planners alike need to recognize that the creative and media functions are inexorably linked, even if the advertising world often sees the creative side as vastly more important. That’s just not the case in the real world; a consumer who is exposed to the same TV commercial repeatedly or in an ad-cluttered break is unlikely to respond nearly as well as a consumer who sees a reduced number of TV commercials, along with some digital video messages and a P4C magazine ad. Similarly, a brand whose basic positioning story emphasizes its convenience, low price or health benefits will undoubtedly perform better if it is seen in an editorial environment that reflects its message. Can such a connection be determined simply by knowing how many adults aged 18-49 each TV show, website or radio station reaches? Of course not. This also applies to how media mixes overlap and complement each other. Is delivering a message only one way—with TV—the best approach, or are there enough consumers who respond better to other forms of communication to make them worth catering to through a media mix?
In addition, the media side of the equation is all too often oriented towards potential, not actual, audiences, and there is the assumption on the part of creatives that their ads will be seen and therefore have an effect. As a result, questions such as how much frequency is needed or if media can be better used to target customers by time or day or mindset remain unanswered.
The forthcoming Cross-Platform Dimensions 2021 addresses the issues of how to evaluate the performance of each of the media in terms of targeted audience attainment and—crucially to advertisers—ad exposure and impact. It provides a complete review of these topics, including many exclusive datasets, to provide a clear picture of the kinds of audiences and reach potentials of each medium. Crucially, it does so in the context of how media planning is actually done, and accounts for the factors that impact it beyond the numbers. The 2021 edition will be available next week; more information can be found here.
TiVo’s twice-yearly Video Trends Reports often feature interesting insights into the changing landscape of “TV” in its many forms, and the 4th quarter 2020 edition is no exception. In the report, TiVo examined what they call “subscription hopping,” which is moving between services including traditional pay TV and OTT. Not surprisingly, respondents’ primary reason for adding one or more video subscriptions in this time period was “We’re at home more and have more time to watch” (63%), while the top reason for cancelling one or more services was “Our household income has been affected by coronavirus” (45%). As shown in the table below, more people are still adding services than cancelling them, but this will undoubtedly change. As life begins to return to “normal” with more people getting vaccinated and more likely to leave the house, they will have less time for television. And the ever-growing roster of contenders in the streaming market will cause people to make decisions about which services are really worth it to them. We look forward to tracking how these numbers change in 2021.
